Considering the Church’s incremental destruction since the day John XXIII appeared St. Peter’s Central balcony, it is a consolation to understand how the Church’s enemies pulled it off, IMHO.

THIS^^^.  There's no need to malign the Church, her indefectibility, and the protection of the Holy Spirit over the true Catholic Church.  It really is this simple.  We have a bunch of Catholics here who think it's OK to say that the Catholic Church became a whore ... rather than identify the real culprits, illegitimate enemy infiltrators.

This is precisely the impact.  When you have a legitimate Magisterium, it is not permissible for Catholic to simply "compare [it] to the docuмents of any prior council to see [it] opposes the teaching of the Church."  Magisterium IS the teaching of the Church, and it's guardian and interpreter.  We can't move on until all that R&R garbage is laid to rest and the honor of the Church is restored ... which it will be when it does come out that Siri had been the pope the entire time.  Otherwise, we're no different than the Prots, who said exactly the same thing, that the Catholic Church in their day had gone corrupt and had departed from the teaching of the early Church.

There is no moving on from this.  It must be definitely resolved in favor of the indefectibility of the Catholic Church and the authority of the Catholic Magisterium, which is being destroyed.  Your assertion that Catholic eccleisology is of no practical consequence couldn't be farther from the truth.  We have even Trad Catholics losing faith in the Catholic Church.

To whom do we present proof of Cardinal Siri’s election?

Depending on when he actually lost it and what one believes about whether the Cardinals appointed by the Conciliar Anti-popes, and whether you're a sedeprivationist, etc., it would impact which subsequent pontificates his holding of office would have impeded.

Conclaves were held, while +Siri was still alive, in 1958 (Roncalli), 1963 (Montini), 1978 (Luciani and Wojtyla).

Presumably the "fell from office" crowd could point to the date that +Siri fell from office, since they're so determined that he did and have all kinds of evidence to back it up, right?

I would think it would have been after 1963.  So the implication is that Luciani & Wojtyla MAY have been legitimately elected (if you're a privationist).

I don't really believe in this "fell from office" stuff.  I hold with St. Robert et al. that a once-legitimate Catholic pope will be prevented by God from falling from office due to heresy.  Later, some SVs (like Father Cekada) started to agree and said it's a sign that these men where never popes in the first place.  But what about +Siri then?  He was clearly not any kind of "manifest heretic" yet by 1958 or 1963.

All this talk about manifest heresy deposing from office is entirely moot if the Siri theory proves to be true ... as I'm convinced that it will.

We need to take the Dimonds with a huge grain of salt.  If a Bishop Williamson were elected to the papacy, the Dimonds would continue to hold that the See remained vacant because Bishop Williamson, according to them, is a manifest heretic.

This nonsense comes from the fact that the Dimonds don't understand formal/pertinacious heresy vs. material error ... which I should think they would given how much time they spend on the EENS issue (and it's all related).

I'm not a Dimondite but their reasoning behind it is simple enough.  There is no one on Earth higher than a Valid Pope.  This Pope should be THE go to for things partaining to The Faith (and Morals)...that just makes sense.  He is required to know The Faith and should have all the answers on Faith and Morals.  If he doesn't get something right that a simple layman can then it's an imposter in The Chair. 

This answers a lot of the objections people make about ths and similar topics.

https://schismatic-home-aloner.com/21_Objections.pdf

As far Siri goes.  I suspend judgment on the issue for the time being.  I do think it's possible there is a hidden Pope somewhere that might have been in the Siri/Gregory XVII line.  There's also the conspiracy about 2 different Paul VI's with one being an actor and imposter and the other being the real one that was jailed underground and tortured.

Probably because they've come to a point where they can't proceed because they're not meant to be solved by laymen. There's only so many times you can explain how the problem with the Pope question is not about recognizing and deposing a heretical Pope but the indefectibility of the Church before it becomes stale.

Absolutely. This problem is beyond "reason enlightened by faith." It is going to take legitimate authority to solve. 

But there is a collateral problem that makes things exponentially worse; and it is that men in valid orders, yet without a shred of legitimate authority, are coming up, left and right, with their own "doctrines" that they shove down the throats of traditional seminarians and faithful, complete with sacramental blackmail, most especially, the withholding of priestly ordination. Withholding Holy Communion, a crime endemic among such persons, is reprehensible enough; but withholding priestly ordination perpetuates the suppurating sickness, and embeds it in the mentality of the entire paste.  

I don't think it is beyond conception that these parasites are worse, in the mind of God, than the original enemies who captured the Church's Offices.

There are cօռspιʀαcιҽs, there always have been, even at the time of Our Lord. But having this fixation on them, as I have realized, is not overall beneficial to our spiritual well-being.

I find the overarching knowledge of the cօռspιʀαcιҽs, and their descriptions given by Fathers, Doctors, Saints, and Catholic Bishops and Priests, to be very helpful in my spiritual life. 

What I think is pure poison, and spiritually harmful, is the alt media propaganda, sensationalism, and "analysis." That's where you are going to get the pure gnosticism you alluded to earlier. The alt media is far worse than CNN, because it has great power to deceive even the elect.

THIS^^^.  There's no need to malign the Church, her indefectibility, and the protection of the Holy Spirit over the true Catholic Church.  It really is this simple.  We have a bunch of Catholics here who think it's OK to say that the Catholic Church became a whore ... rather than identify the real culprits, illegitimate enemy infiltrators.

.

Yeah, I see your point of view, Ladislaus, on the Siri thesis in general, in how it could provide an explanation for the crisis. If it's true, it could, but something like that should not be accepted without proof, which we don't seem to have.

I have a major problem, though, with the idea that Cardinal Siri continued to be pope until his death. (This is leaving aside any question of his orthodoxy or acceptance of Vatican 2; let's assume for the sake of argument that he remained orthodox). Let's suppose by your theory that he may have mistakenly thought he had resigned, when his resignation had actually been invalid because of duress. He would still have relinquished the papacy, if he had it to begin with, by going back to Genoa and continuing to serve as a cardinal and recognizing someone else as pope and never claiming to be pope. All of those things constitute an implicit resignation, since he made it clear by his actions that he didn't intend to function as pope.

This should be common sense, but if you're not convinced, it's basically laid out in canon law. In the 1917 code, the famous canon 188 says that

Any office becomes vacant upon the fact and without any declaration by tacit resignation recognized by the law itself if a cleric:

This is familiar to most of us because of number 4, which is if he "publicly defects from the Catholic faith", but there are two other sections in that code that would preclude your theory on the declining years of Cardinal Siri. First there's

Within the useful time established by law or, legal provision lacking, as determined by the Ordinary, fails to take possession of the office;

So, if someone doesn't take possession of an office within the time established by law, that's considered a tacit resignation. Again, this is just common sense, that an office must be exercised, and if someone is appointed to an office and never claims possession of it, then he is considered to be resigning that office. Now, what constitutes taking possession of the papacy could be debatable, but it should be obviously that going back to Genoa and wearing red and telling people to call you "Cardinal So-and-So" and recognizing someone else as pope for the rest of your life cannot be considered taking possession of the office of the papacy.

The other section that is relevant here is:

Accepts another ecclesiastical office incompatible with the prior, and has obtained peaceful possession of [the other office]

This is another common-sense regulation. Obviously being cardinal of Genoa is incompatible with being pope, so if someone chooses to be cardinal of Genoa instead of being pope, regardless of whether he understood that he was or wasn't pope, or understood that this would be a resignation of the papacy, or whatever else, this is an automatic resignation of the papacy.

Putting the invalidated 1958 Conclave into context, here's a photo of Pope Gregory XVII's usurper, Roncalli, receiving his Cardinal's hat from an atheist.




1953: John XXIII, as a cardinal, choosing to receive his cardinal's hat from notorious Anti-Catholic Vincent Auriol

Roncalli knelt before Auriol, and Auriol placed the cardinal’s biretta on Roncalli’s head.  Auriol then hung a “broad red ribbon around the cardinal’s neck embracing him on each cheek with a little bear-hug that imparted personal warmth to formal protocol.”[16]  Auriol had to wipe away his tears with a handkerchief when Roncalli left to assume his new dignity as “cardinal.”[17]

Sources:

[16] Alden Hatch, A Man Named John, p. 123.

[17] Kurt Klinger, A Pope Laughs, p. 99.

It's not a feeling, it's the facts that the puppetmasters over Biden are:
1. trying to foment WW3
2. used the Afghanistan withdrawal to bring terrorists into the US, and to signal US weakness to our enemies
3.. are using the open border to bring in more terrorists, drugs and sex-trafficking.
4. are using Soros-funded D.A.s to release, or never charge, violent criminals
5. have made us dependent on the CCP for medicines
6. have destroyed the energy independance we had under Trump
7. are killing people with an gene "therapy" experiment
8. are using their control of the media so most people beleive the lies and deny the truth
9. are using their control of search engines to keep people believing their lies
10. Russia realizes the US is the head of the evil globalist cabal and numerous generals and others in the Kremlin have made threats to destroy both coasts of the US (which are backed up by weapons against which we have no defense).
11. Are collapsing the economy.
12. Are signaling that they plan to release another gain-of-function bio-warfare weapon agains the population.
13. Are criminalizing -- as a terrorist threat -- any criticism of CRT, LGBTQ, the 2020 election, the sɛҳuąƖization of young children in public school.

and much more.

All of this, I pray, will make us stronger Catholics.

Sorry for the spelling but I have severe back pain and am waiting for an MRI (for which there is no contrast to make the image clearer, because China.)

So very sorry to hear about your back pain. May God relieve you very soon!

Your list makes me want to grab the Brioschi bottle! I think it might be succinctly reformatted to consist of one, and one bullet point alone: Vatican II.

Doesn't that encompass it all?

Lord Jesus, save us! We perish!!